Needs Pictures: 0
Results 16 to 30 of 34
Thread: Saw storage
-
26th April 2018, 05:04 PM #16
As you know Ian, those large mitre boxes (mine is a Millers Falls Langdon 74C) and their saws are much loved by our USA cousins, all of whom seem to own several. I am not sure if they are actually used as the work pieces they are sized for is really way too large for the average furniture part. In my mind, these saws and their boxes are carpenter tools, that is, portable saws that would have been used in framing. The saw plates are 28" and 30" long and 6" deep. Huge! I do not recall when it was last used. I would sell it if I could get my money back, but I dare anyone in Oz to try and find one like mine (original mitrebox and saw) for under $750. Most would just prefer a powered saw for that.
More useful by far is the other Miller's Falls mitrebox I have, a #115. This is tiny by comparison, and so useful for small mouldings and trim used in furniture. Unfortunately for most, Chris Schwarz blogged about his, and the price is now beyond that of the large models.
Here is the #74C and the #115 (before the 115 was restored) ...
And here is the restored #115, along with the saw I made for it (16" long and 2 1/2" deep plate) ...
Regards the other saws in the till, they are 16" and 14" tenon saws, 14" carcase saws, 11" cross cut detail saws, and 10" dovetail saws. I like dovetail saws.
Regards from Perth
DerekVisit www.inthewoodshop.com for tutorials on constructing handtools, handtool reviews, and my trials and tribulations with furniture builds.
-
26th April 2018 05:04 PM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
26th April 2018, 06:26 PM #17
Derek
I have always assumed the larger saws and mitre boxes were intended for carpenters in a time when skirting boards, cornice and possibly crown mouldings were substantial compared to today. A 6" skirting would have needed 6" under the back.
Regards
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
26th April 2018, 08:18 PM #18
-
26th April 2018, 08:36 PM #19
I guess if the neighbor ask's if they can borrow a saw the reply would be along the lines of "sorry I can't find one".
-
27th April 2018, 01:42 AM #20
too nice not to repost
I sort of gathered that from previous posts.
So what I thought was a pair of Veritas molded-spine carcass saws (Rip an cross cut), is really the 14 tpi and 20 tpi dovetail saws.
for others reading this thread, how do you quickly tell which saw is which? -- as in "I want a cross-cut carcass saw, or the 20 tpi dovetail"?regards from Alberta, Canada
ian
-
27th April 2018, 01:46 AM #21regards from Alberta, Canada
ian
-
27th April 2018, 03:12 AM #22Visit www.inthewoodshop.com for tutorials on constructing handtools, handtool reviews, and my trials and tribulations with furniture builds.
-
27th April 2018, 07:28 PM #23
Derek
The mitre saws were remarkably consistent right across the manufacturing range. As far as tooth configuration was concerned they were not often quoted in the catalogues as it was a Henry Ford job (any colour you like so long as it is black.....which I think may be a fallacy) in that it was any PPI you liked as long as it was 11ppi (10tpi). For example this is from a 1929 Disston publication (the catalogues rarely stooped to having to explain how many teeth a back saw had)
Disston saw toolfile 1929 Mitre saw.png
Simonds mitre saws I have measured all at 11ppi, but nothing is stated in their catalogues. Ppi is only mentioned for their dovetail style mini saws.
So 11ppi was universal for mitre saws right across the board: At least that's what I thought until recently when I read this from an Atkins 1923 catalogue (whoa, a catalogue with information! Clear the table and let's get into it. How good is that?) :
Atkins Mitre saw 1923 cat.jpg
You can see details of gauge as well as ppi. Although, in principle, the three different depths under the back were available, it was in fact the longer lengths that could be had with the greater depth.
Actually I am being just a little facetious here as the back saws did not normally have their ppi quoted. Atkins seem to be an exception. I am currently eating my hat. It's really very good being low in sugar, gluten free and lactose free. Actually, I think it suited the original rabbit far better.
Just on your little saw, that is really a back saw, which you made so I think that explains the different tooth configuration. Something I would point to is the different type of heel on the mitre saws. Also a large mitre saw with a, say, 26" tooth line will actually be classified as a 28" saw because it is measured along the back which extends further into the handle than the standard back saws.
One last point I would make, and I have to say I have not yet tried this for myself, is that at least one of the professional saw sharpeners from the internet uses extreme fleam when sharpening these saws. 35 degs from memory, although not so much as the 45 degs of Disston's no set No.77.
I really like your large Langdon mitre box .
Regards
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
28th April 2018, 02:20 AM #24
Henry Ford's "any colour as long as it's black" is not a fallacy. Black was the only colour that would try fast enough for Henry's assembly line to work as intended.
regards from Alberta, Canada
ian
-
28th April 2018, 02:26 AM #25
-
28th April 2018, 09:22 AM #26
-
28th April 2018, 09:40 AM #27
Ian
There was a big overlap in back saw and mitre saw sizes. In the smaller sizes the only difference between them was the shape of the heel, which allegedly was rounded on the mitre saw to prevent it getting caught in the work. I have to say I don't quite see what they mean by that so if anybody can explain I would appreciate it. In the larger mitre saws the distinction became the choice of depth under the back, which can be seen in the Atkins extract above.
If I can take the Simonds brand for a moment they made saws as follows:
Mitre saws (No.95) 18"to 32" (4" under back)
Mitre saws (No.95) 24" to 32" (5" under back)
Mitre saws (No.95) 22" to 32" (6" under back)
Back saw (No.96) 8" to 18"
Back saw (No.97) 8" to 22"
Back saw (No.98) 6" to 24" (Bay State brand)
Back saw (No.99) 6" to 14" (Babbitt brand)
The back saws would have varied with the depth under the back but this is not stated. At no time is any mention made for the number of teeth.
So there is some difference between the two types, but fundamentally the saws are the same and I'm sure many users would have just put a large back saw with their mitre box. Not everybody in those days would have been cashed up!
One more difference has just come to mind and that is mitre saws often had a small hole in the spline right at the toe. This was to insert a pin or nail so that when the saw was drawn back in the mitre box it could not come out of the rear tower. Most of my mitre saws have this, but I am not clear whether it was a manufacturers feature. All I can say is that the holes all look the same. It is true to say that this could easily be included on a back saw too.
Regards
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
28th April 2018, 10:17 AM #28
I asked a similar question a while back - I wanted my japanese saws on the doors but not hanging from a nail or two
my thread
sawtill_8956.jpgsawtill.jpgsawtill_8957.jpgsawtill_8953.jpg
regards
Nick
veni, vidi, tornavi
Without wood it's just ...
-
28th April 2018, 11:48 AM #29
Nick
That is an elegant cabinet and a good solution if you don't want to drill holes. However, I accept that JP saws are a challenge to sharpen and may well be sacrificial , particularly at the lower end of the spectrum, so a hole in the handle may not be so abhorrent as it might otherwise be.
Your sawtill and Derek's sawtill and Ian's sawtill and Oraloon's sawtill are so smart. Just as well IanW has not posted a pic of his cabinet or I would slide into a terminal depression!
Ummm...I wonder if I painted mine .
Regards
PaulBushmiller;
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"
-
28th April 2018, 05:55 PM #30
Because of the design of the cabinet I had to have the handles down - If I'd had the handles up and hanging then I would have to stretch to be able to reach them
regards
Nick
veni, vidi, tornavi
Without wood it's just ...
Similar Threads
-
Saw Storage
By DSEL74 in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 77Last Post: 1st October 2016, 04:44 PM -
bad storage
By Not enough!! in forum SMALL TIMBER MILLINGReplies: 10Last Post: 22nd September 2016, 07:07 PM -
Bit Storage
By DSEL74 in forum METALWORK FORUMReplies: 30Last Post: 14th July 2015, 08:23 PM -
PM storage???
By JTTHECLOCKMAN in forum FORUMS INFO, HELP, DISCUSSION & FEEDBACKReplies: 4Last Post: 29th June 2014, 09:59 PM